If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Comment

Let us ask mgraesslin if you are correct or not. That will answer another question as well. Is KDE able to communicate about this agreemnt in a fair and transparent way?

i don't know what you mean with fair and transparent, he linked all the actual contracts in a public page of kde.org and the repositories are 100% public in qtproject.org, QTopia was killed 90% with Qt4 and totally scrapped with Qt5.X and wayland in Qt5 is an external project in gitorious + EGL improvements in QtGui/Opengl/core all available publically in qtproject.org and licensed as LGPL.

How LGPL/GPL works is totally publically available from FSF and even explained in youtube from stallman in some videos

what you want? a puppet show in youtube with big big letters to explain it to you line per line? otherwise i think is quite self explaning and really easy to figure it out since everything is entirely public and even so you have mailing list / IRC logs publically available too over all discussions concerned to this matter

Comment

if you wanna whine about licenses/contracts in any project private or public you need a lawyer degree for the details and minimal reading skills to understand it, this is like really ovbious or you will let your chef friend make a contract for you? i bet you will call a lawyer in the same sense you will not call your stripper friend to do your taxes, you will pay an accountant!! which again is baltantly ovbious

Comment

my dear child, I took the time to look for the link to the mailing list thread just for you. To give you a non-legal-speak explanation of the topic. As I took the time it would be totally awesome if you would read them. Some of your questions are answered there.

Wayland is basically covered. The agreement states "X Window System or any successor [...]". Android is covered, what else is "embedded linux" or relevant in that regard I do not know. If you had read the mails I linked to you would have also got an update on the non-linux (which is wrong in the first place as BSD, etc. is covered) and the problems from legal perspective.

I think it is great this is set in stone now, you should educate who ever falsely claim that KDE have some kind of super power and they can do ehat ever they want with Qt's lisence. Because it is not true.

Uh I think nobody ever claimed that. The idea behind the foundation is to have a safety-net in case the development to Qt is stopped and to prevent proprietary forks.

Comment

If you check my blog you will find that I said that I would not sign the Canonical CLA, because I would need a lawyer to properly understand it and to have it explained to me. For Qt I didn't need to, because I know that KDE's lawyer checked the CLA.

Comment

All the lawyers in the world couldn't help you. You have extremely poor/selective reading comprehension, and as soon as someone tells you something you don't want to hear, you twist their words and/or take them out of context to fit your biased view. You have a better chance of understanding open-source licensing by taking a legal textbook and beating yourself over the head (if you need help with that, let me know).

Comment

Two competing explanations have be proposed to explain the sudden loss of contributors at KDE.

1) People walked away.
2) Most commits happens to feature branches where merges make more than half the contributor names disappear. Not by merge, but per month, that is a whole lot ghost hacking if you ask me.

You can always opt for the less likely explanation, but doing this AND throw ad hominem insults might push it a bit too far.

The answer, as you and I know it, is 2. Please, browse freely all of their KDE ghost hacking repositories. Nothing of what you are going to see is registered in Ohloh.